Today, Israel carried out an airstrike against the China-Iran railway, marking the first direct attack on a key strategic asset of China’s Belt and Road Initiative.
Did the Soviet Union support the Nazis by trading grain for machine tools between 1939 and 1941? Did they support imperialism by importing Western technology throughout the Cold War? No. I and many others would say it was quite the opposite. The same materialist logic applies here. China trades/traded commercial goods for semiconductors, diamonds, and optical equipment that cannot/could not be sourced elsewhere due to imperialist pressure and technological containment. This is not support.
Support is defined by net strategic effect, not mechanical commodity flows. The net effect is: China materially supports the Axis of Resistance while maintaining marginal civilian trade with a US client state.
The net effect is: Israel’s economy continues to function with China’s material support, they would be in a worse position if they were deprived of Chinese trade. Even if we disregard Hong Kong, 8% would be a serious shock - especially under current conditions! Then China could began pressuring its own trading partners to also stop trading with Israel; Hong Kong might even follow. This would have a serious cost to China, though, and they have likely determined the cost is too high and the risks too great.
What they’re doing now, supporting the Axis of Resistance while avoiding Western retaliation, is likely the best strategic option.
But that doesn’t mean we should just disregard trade as having material impact. We’re materialists, not moralists. We can accept that China is materially supporting Israel through trade while also understanding that this isn’t some kind of moral failing, and that there are additional considerations that are being made to inform their overall strategy towards Israel.
So, you seem to be equating material support for endorsement. Those aren’t the same thing.
We can say that China supports Israel with trade relations without actually endorsing them.
Did the Soviet Union support the Nazis by trading grain for machine tools between 1939 and 1941? Did they support imperialism by importing Western technology throughout the Cold War? No. I and many others would say it was quite the opposite. The same materialist logic applies here. China trades/traded commercial goods for semiconductors, diamonds, and optical equipment that cannot/could not be sourced elsewhere due to imperialist pressure and technological containment. This is not support.
Support is defined by net strategic effect, not mechanical commodity flows. The net effect is: China materially supports the Axis of Resistance while maintaining marginal civilian trade with a US client state.
The net effect is: Israel’s economy continues to function with China’s material support, they would be in a worse position if they were deprived of Chinese trade. Even if we disregard Hong Kong, 8% would be a serious shock - especially under current conditions! Then China could began pressuring its own trading partners to also stop trading with Israel; Hong Kong might even follow. This would have a serious cost to China, though, and they have likely determined the cost is too high and the risks too great.
What they’re doing now, supporting the Axis of Resistance while avoiding Western retaliation, is likely the best strategic option.
But that doesn’t mean we should just disregard trade as having material impact. We’re materialists, not moralists. We can accept that China is materially supporting Israel through trade while also understanding that this isn’t some kind of moral failing, and that there are additional considerations that are being made to inform their overall strategy towards Israel.